Dems need to lift ban on domestic oil drilling

chestnut

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2008
Messages
1,222
Werbung:
Two schools of thought here for me.
Firstly, I am from an oil state, and I think we need more responsible oil development. Namely getting Exxon off thier butts to develop the Pt. Thompson field, it sounds like they are moving somewhat, but they have been promising to do it for the last 30 years.

Then there is the ANWR question. I am one who says drill ANWR, suck it dry, designate a new ANWR and drill there to. But also in places where there is abundant and critical shipping, and fisheries, we should be working to develop the offshore resources. Beaufort Sea as an example.

Then of course there is a concept that I have often discussed with people in AK who want to not drill ANWR, which is when the world comes into the reality of the petroleum end game, isnt it better to let everyone else use thiers first, and we be among the few with massive untapped reserves? Just an idea Ill throw out.
 
It only makes sense. Since we have oodles of oil in our own back yard, why won't we finally do something.

Dems probably just like controlling us too much, so if there was a solution, it would end their control. And that is not what they want.
ooooooooooooooooo....probably, huh? What a well-thought-out opinion. :rolleyes:

You PROBABLY needed to pay a little-more attention, during the Presidential-campaigning. :rolleyes:

July, 15, 2008

"The president, in his final months in office, has turned to increased oil exploration among other options amid record gas prices. None would have immediate impact on prices at the pump, according to White House officials, who say there is no quick fix. But acting now would help, they say.

Neither Congress nor the president is likely to force any big changes in energy policies during the final months of the Bush administration, Biden acknowledged.

“The price of nothing happening is better than the price of something happening,” Biden said, noting his opposition to the offshore leasing change proposed by Bush. “What we can do is prevent things from getting a lot worse.”

The White House has conceded that additional leases are unlikely to have any short-term impact, because of the time needed to find and develop new wellfields.

Biden said energy companies already have more than 7,100 offshore leases in hand that could give them access to nearly 80 percent of the known offshore oil reserves. Even if developed, he added, other major oil-producing nations would simply cut production to keep the small amount of new American supplies from affecting prices."

What.....the oil-companies have been waiting for someone-else to do their drilling, for them???

:rolleyes:
 
Then there is the ANWR question. I am one who says drill ANWR, suck it dry, designate a new ANWR and drill there to. But also in places where there is abundant and critical shipping, and fisheries, we should be working to develop the offshore resources. Beaufort Sea as an example.
Another example would have been off-the-coast of Florida....when The Jebber was Governor, there....if he wanted-to-do The Patriotic Thing, but....I think it was different, for Florida, back then.

:rolleyes:
 
Shaman, do you or don't you agree that if we have available oil in this country we should start drilling?

Do you like being dependent on OPEC?

One of the things Obama did after he got in office was to stop the plans to drill in Utah.

I realize it will take time but we have to start.
 
Another example would have been off-the-coast of Florida....when The Jebber was Governor, there....if he wanted-to-do The Patriotic Thing, but....I think it was different, for Florida, back then.

:rolleyes:

Yeah, I think you missed the first letter in the acronym entirely in ANWR. A stands for Arctic. Not exactly much of that in FLA.
 
Strawman argument. Why didnt Bush push for more drilling when he had the chance. For 6 years Bush was in the WH and had a GOP controlled congress, and he didnt pursue American resource development. He pursued foreign oil development, in the 52nd state, Iraq.

Is this a joke? Bush and Republicans in both the House and Senate pushed for years and took many votes in both chambers that were then reversed for various reasons. Republicans (Bush and Congress) all have been pushing for more drilling for over a decade. Not to mention, Republicans never had a filibuster proof majority, which proved to be a massive problem on this issues.
 
Strawman argument. Why didnt Bush push for more drilling when he had the chance. For 6 years Bush was in the WH and had a GOP controlled congress, and he didnt pursue American resource development. He pursued foreign oil development, in the 52nd state, Iraq.

Simple answer. He was too busy holding the Saudi leaders' hand and taking long photo-op walks with him.
 
Is this a joke? Bush and Republicans in both the House and Senate pushed for years and took many votes in both chambers that were then reversed for various reasons. Republicans (Bush and Congress) all have been pushing for more drilling for over a decade. Not to mention, Republicans never had a filibuster proof majority, which proved to be a massive problem on this issues.

The only bill passed and brought to the President concerning ANWR was back in 98 I believe and Clinton vetoed.

Bush promised to make ANWR a central issue in a domestic energy policy, and that was all forgotten in a big way for 5 years when he could have easily done it.
 
The only bill passed and brought to the President concerning ANWR was back in 98 I believe and Clinton vetoed.

Bush promised to make ANWR a central issue in a domestic energy policy, and that was all forgotten in a big way for 5 years when he could have easily done it.

There were votes in 98, which was vetoed, it passed the House again in 2000, only to have the Senate remove it. It passed again in 2005, and was removed in conference. (as part of the budget)

It was then again added as a defense appropriations addition in 2005, and was removed again by the Senate.

The basic split that existed in the Senate is what caused the drilling in ANWR never to get passed. The House passed it numerous times, and a non-filibuster proof Senate blocked it every time.
 
Simple answer. He was too busy holding the Saudi leaders' hand and taking long photo-op walks with him.
Oh I know. Those pictures make me ill. We played into the Saudi hands better than they could have ever wished for.

Nevermind 15 of thier citizens killed 3000 of our citizens and destroyed landmarks and has caused us to spend untold hundreds of billions on more security, and then managed to remove thier biggest foreign threat, only to have them refuse to help us in the effort.

When it comes to the US under the Bush family and the House of Saud, it is all to similar to a marraige with serious domestic violence and control issues.

As long as they keep feeding us oil, we will do thier dirty work.
 
Werbung:
Back
Top